- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Cryptocurrency: Critical Thinking re Decentral vs Rest
by grarpamp 08 Aug '18

08 Aug '18

Ultimate Cheat Sheet for Critical Thinking https://i.redd.it/k5fyetg8ooe11.jpg

1 0

I only ordered a hand rolled maduro
by Steven Schear 07 Aug '18

07 Aug '18

Did I miss the Augur wager? https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-04/explosions-during-maduro-speech-s…

3 2

Great bet for Forecast Foundation Ethereum/Augur betting system:
by jim bell 07 Aug '18

07 Aug '18

"Will this prediction be false?" Jim Bell

1 0

Re: Improvement on the Jim Bell AP
by weroh＠Safe-mail.net 07 Aug '18

07 Aug '18

This can be a good way to develop it: 1 - The AP service will list all the names of the politicians in the concress/parlament/government, as they are already well known. Users will be able to put money on some of them, or all of them (shared money). This is the usual AP with the improvement. 2 - The AP service will also allow users to create bounties to get a leak of name lists of all the local policemen, or local politicians or bureaucrats in a city, or region, or district, or country or the entire state. 3 - After the AP service receives a list, the service staff will make a first check internally, and if they think that the list can be a good confirmed one, they will put it on "public debate", from the users of the service. The list should be visible to anyone, even guest users. This step is important, because all the global news will talk about the name list, and so all the state employees (even the ones that aren't on the current list) will become completely crazy. If they aren't on the current list, they will be afraid of being on the next one. 4 - If the list is confirmed even from the public debate (the service staff has the last word), the names on the list will be added, and users will now be able to put money also on them. The user that gave the now confirmed name list to the AP service will now get the money from the dedicated bounty created at step 2. I think that if the panic from the state employees is enough, everything will just stop at step 3. The state will already disappear. So no deaths at all. Many of them will leave their jobs. They will probably put their confirmation of dismissal on their facebook profile in the hope of being removed from the service. Even if someone of their colleagues will die for natural reasons, or even for a car accident, they will still think that someone has killed him/her. I guess that they will be in complete panic. -------- Original Message -------- From: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net To: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net Cc: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: Improvement on the Jim Bell AP Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 20:16:39 -0400 > One last thing. > > I think that this way is also less violent than the original AP, because after adding on list the name of all the politicians, all the policemen, all burocrats, after few deaths, no one will ever want to continue to work for the state, at least no one of the low grade state employees. > > No one of them is paid enough to risk their life daily. > > So every authority will find himself powerless, without anyone available to get his orders. > > The state will probably disappears after few deaths. > > > -------- Original Message -------- > From: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net > To: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net > Cc: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org > Subject: Re: Improvement on the Jim Bell AP > Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:48:39 -0400 > > > I want to add that this improvement works because who put the money isn't probably interested on who should die first, every politics should die, the order isn't really important. > > > > Another good thing about this way it is that if some politicians have some money shared on their heads, everyone of them will be incentived to kill himself the others, his colleagues, by hoping to lower the money on his own head. > > > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > From: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net > > Apparently from: cypherpunks-bounces(a)lists.cpunks.org > > To: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org > > Subject: Improvement on the Jim Bell AP > > Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2018 20:26:32 -0400 > > > > > I thought about a way to make an "improvement" on the Jim Bell AP. > > > > > > I think that this will make it "cheaper", faster and so more effective. > > > > > > It starts from the part that as there could be more assassins competing for the prize. > > > > > > Some of them can be uncertain that the prize could be too much low for the risk of killing the politician. > > > > > > But at the same time, because of the possible competing killers, everyone of them can even be afraid that another assassin could be brave, skilled or just lucky to being able to kill the politician for a lower prize. > > > > > > So this is already a good incentive to push all the killers to try to kill the politician for a lower prize. > > > > > > What I thought is a way to make this incentive even more effective. > > > > > > > > > "Shared money" > > > > > > Everyone should be able (if they want) to put their money on more politicians "contemporary", even on every politicians on the service or others that they can add later. > > > > > > Those shared money should be pubblic visible to everyone, so even killers should be able to see them at any time. > > > > > > On the possible interface of the service, it should be possible, by clicking on a politician, to see how much money on him are shared with other politicians. > > > > > > So what happen when if one of the politicians that has some shared money on him gets killed? > > > > > > Those shared money will obviously get removed by all the prize of all the other selected politicians (chosen before by the users that have put their own money) and will go to the winning killer. > > > > > > With this, I think that all killers will then know that while they are thinking about killing "Politician A", if the money on his prize is shared with other 4/5 politicians, they will be now even worried that another killer will terminate one of the other politicians, and so then lowering the prize of their selected politician as a possible target. > > > > > > Users will still be happy because another politician has been killed anyway. > > > > > > Users will then be able to put even 1$ contemporary on every politician of their country (or the entire world), waiting that the first one of them gets killed. > > > > > > Then again, 1$ over all the remaining politicians and so on ... > > > > > > > > > What do you think about this idea/improvement? > > > > > > Is it clear enough?

1 0

Improvement on the Jim Bell AP
by weroh＠Safe-mail.net 07 Aug '18

07 Aug '18

I thought about a way to make an "improvement" on the Jim Bell AP. I think that this will make it "cheaper", faster and so more effective. It starts from the part that as there could be more assassins competing for the prize. Some of them can be uncertain that the prize could be too much low for the risk of killing the politician. But at the same time, because of the possible competing killers, everyone of them can even be afraid that another assassin could be brave, skilled or just lucky to being able to kill the politician for a lower prize. So this is already a good incentive to push all the killers to try to kill the politician for a lower prize. What I thought is a way to make this incentive even more effective. "Shared money" Everyone should be able (if they want) to put their money on more politicians "contemporary", even on every politicians on the service or others that they can add later. Those shared money should be pubblic visible to everyone, so even killers should be able to see them at any time. On the possible interface of the service, it should be possible, by clicking on a politician, to see how much money on him are shared with other politicians. So what happen when if one of the politicians that has some shared money on him gets killed? Those shared money will obviously get removed by all the prize of all the other selected politicians (chosen before by the users that have put their own money) and will go to the winning killer. With this, I think that all killers will then know that while they are thinking about killing "Politician A", if the money on his prize is shared with other 4/5 politicians, they will be now even worried that another killer will terminate one of the other politicians, and so then lowering the prize of their selected politician as a possible target. Users will still be happy because another politician has been killed anyway. Users will then be able to put even 1$ contemporary on every politician of their country (or the entire world), waiting that the first one of them gets killed. Then again, 1$ over all the remaining politicians and so on ... What do you think about this idea/improvement? Is it clear enough?

2 1

Re: Improvement on the Jim Bell AP
by weroh＠Safe-mail.net 07 Aug '18

07 Aug '18

One last thing. I think that this way is also less violent than the original AP, because after adding on list the name of all the politicians, all the policemen, all burocrats, after few deaths, no one will ever want to continue to work for the state, at least no one of the low grade state employees. No one of them is paid enough to risk their life daily. So every authority will find himself powerless, without anyone available to get his orders. The state will probably disappears after few deaths. -------- Original Message -------- From: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net To: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net Cc: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: Improvement on the Jim Bell AP Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:48:39 -0400 > I want to add that this improvement works because who put the money isn't probably interested on who should die first, every politics should die, the order isn't really important. > > Another good thing about this way it is that if some politicians have some money shared on their heads, everyone of them will be incentived to kill himself the others, his colleagues, by hoping to lower the money on his own head. > > > -------- Original Message -------- > From: weroh(a)Safe-mail.net > Apparently from: cypherpunks-bounces(a)lists.cpunks.org > To: cypherpunks(a)lists.cpunks.org > Subject: Improvement on the Jim Bell AP > Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2018 20:26:32 -0400 > > > I thought about a way to make an "improvement" on the Jim Bell AP. > > > > I think that this will make it "cheaper", faster and so more effective. > > > > It starts from the part that as there could be more assassins competing for the prize. > > > > Some of them can be uncertain that the prize could be too much low for the risk of killing the politician. > > > > But at the same time, because of the possible competing killers, everyone of them can even be afraid that another assassin could be brave, skilled or just lucky to being able to kill the politician for a lower prize. > > > > So this is already a good incentive to push all the killers to try to kill the politician for a lower prize. > > > > What I thought is a way to make this incentive even more effective. > > > > > > "Shared money" > > > > Everyone should be able (if they want) to put their money on more politicians "contemporary", even on every politicians on the service or others that they can add later. > > > > Those shared money should be pubblic visible to everyone, so even killers should be able to see them at any time. > > > > On the possible interface of the service, it should be possible, by clicking on a politician, to see how much money on him are shared with other politicians. > > > > So what happen when if one of the politicians that has some shared money on him gets killed? > > > > Those shared money will obviously get removed by all the prize of all the other selected politicians (chosen before by the users that have put their own money) and will go to the winning killer. > > > > With this, I think that all killers will then know that while they are thinking about killing "Politician A", if the money on his prize is shared with other 4/5 politicians, they will be now even worried that another killer will terminate one of the other politicians, and so then lowering the prize of their selected politician as a possible target. > > > > Users will still be happy because another politician has been killed anyway. > > > > Users will then be able to put even 1$ contemporary on every politician of their country (or the entire world), waiting that the first one of them gets killed. > > > > Then again, 1$ over all the remaining politicians and so on ... > > > > > > What do you think about this idea/improvement? > > > > Is it clear enough?

1 0

Defense Distributed 3D Guns Under New Legal Assault
by grarpamp 06 Aug '18

06 Aug '18

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/20-states-take-aim-at-3d-gun-co… Conversation via JW Weatherman (2018 07 27) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrAtsQrs7dY https://twitter.com/radomysisky https://www.attorneygeneral.gov/taking-action/press-releases/attorney-gener… https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4621627-384953267-Complaint-Defense… https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/ag-ferguson-sues-over-trump-admin… https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/07/30/data-allowing… https://defdist.org/ https://defcad.com/ https://fosscad.org/

2 2

Re: [Cryptography] threat models, was Krugman blockchain currency skepticism
by grarpamp 06 Aug '18

06 Aug '18

On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 11:01 AM, John Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: > why don't you use Paypal? > Internal transactions are fast and free, value is ... exchangable > into banks all over the world. No different than say BCH is today. Nor do decentralized cryptocurrencies lie and hide the real costs, it's right there in the tx. Nothing is ever free. > Before arguing that they're not trustworthy They're not, commercially arbitrary middlemen are a bitch. > please compare the number of > people who trust Paypal to do their transactions (on the order of 200 > million) with those who use any sort of cryptocurrency. Why are they > all wrong? Completely invalid comparisons. Paypal has been around a decade longer than cryptocurrency. Ebay rammed its spamvertising integration of Paypal down its user's eyballs and inboxes, hounding them relentlessly to sign up for it, and skewing their policies and features in favor of it over both P2P OOB and their own fiat proxy system. Cryptocurrency users are all right, because they voluntarily chose to search and pull down the info, learn about it, and adopt it freely, all against massive torrents of FUD coming from vested anti's and blue pilled sheeple. Cryptocurrency value moved every month is 30x paypal's and growing. Ten more years and those 200 million users will be on cryptocurrency. > But again, what's your threat model? One of the most basic... loss of freedom. Lots of videos and conferences out there on that, here's just one... https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cryptopulco > If an issuer doesn't redeem a bill > what recourse do you have other than to denounce him? Cryptocurrency... you either have the keys and value or you don't. > [etc, etc, etc] https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bitcoin+documentary What's in your wallet?

1 0

H+Pedia: The Transhumanist Wiki
by grarpamp 05 Aug '18

05 Aug '18

https://hpluspedia.org/

1 0

Augur’s Joey Krug Comments On Assassination Markets
by jim bell 05 Aug '18

05 Aug '18

https://www.ethnews.com/augurs-joey-krug-comments-on-assassination-markets By MATTHEW DE SILVA WRITER ETHNEWS.COM Shortly after Augur’s launch, some users created cryptocurrency-settled assassination markets. Since the Augur protocol exists on the Ethereum blockchain, the marketplace exists across many computers. Because of Augur’s decentralization, law enforcement may struggle to shut down these morbid and highly illegal markets. There's a frightening, niche segment of the cryptocurrency community that is comprised of extreme anarchists. These people aren't just apolitical, they're anti-political (to the point that they will facilitate bets on the lives of politicians). The thinking is roughly this: If there are financial incentives to "off" politicians, then people will be afraid to run for office and thus, the state will collapse. It might sound extreme, but assassination markets are not new phenomena. As early as 2013, some bitcoin enthusiasts were contributing toward assassination markets for prominent public figures including the US president, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, and leaders of US government agencies. In November 2013, Forbes even profiled one of these market creators. Fortunately, nobody cashed in on those bets, which effectively functioned as bounties. When Augur launched earlier this month, it was only a matter of time before cryptocurrency-tied assassination markets reappeared. Initially, Augur's market questions were relatively tame (e.g., "Will the price of Ether be above $500 at the end of 2018?" and "Will England win against Croatia in the 2018 FIFA World Cup?" Spoiler Alert: England lost). However, in the last several days, darker questions were posted about the life of the US president and the lives of other public figures. These assassination markets raise ethical questions for Augur's creators and force us to confront a hideous side of society that seems to lurk in the seemingly pseudonymous depths of the internet. When ETHNews asked Augur co-founder Joey Krug whether there's any way to censor these questions, he simply directed us to Augur's FAQs: > "Users who decide to run the Augur code are the ones who perform trades and create markets on the Augur protocol. All functions of routing orders, matching orders, processing trades, escrow funds, manage the order book and resolve and settle markets are all operated and run on the Ethereum blockchain itself through a set of smart contracts, the Augur core protocol. Miners running Ethereum nodes route, match, store and process orders, trades and markets on the Augur protocol. All funds are escrowed and transferred directly on the Ethereum blockchain itself." In short, Augur seems to be out of Krug's hands. The responsibility instead lies with Augur's users (effectively any member of the public who has the technical know-how and financial wherewithal to place a wager). Another section on Augur's FAQ page explains, "Users of the Augur protocol must themselves ensure that the actions they are performing are compliant with the laws in all applicable jurisdictions and must acknowledge that others' use of the Augur protocol may not be compliant. Users of the Augur protocol do so at their own risk." Note: This seems like an awfully convenient way for Augur's creators to disclaim responsibility, but we're left with the same old question: is the creator of a tool responsible for its usage? Krug, for his part, doesn't seem worried about the assassination markets. He said, "As far as whether I'm personally concerned, it's a bit like asking the creators of SMTP if they're ok with email being used for ransom notes. Obviously, I would prefer people not use the tool for such things!" He continued: "That said, it's irrelevant what I think because if it is illegal, market creators shouldn't be creating such markets anyway, just as people should not write ransom notes with email." Personally, it would be easy to be outraged and appalled by Krug's response. He seems to unintentionally demonstrate the apparent invincibility and irresponsibility of youth. But is he really to blame? Ultimately, I'm persuaded by Krug's point. If it wasn't Augur, there would be another assassination marketplace. Creators cannot control how their tools are used and, more importantly, a few bad apples shouldn't spoil the bunch. Just because a few miscreants have placed bets on people's lives, the prediction market itself is not evil. Augur remains agnostic. It's up to users to ensure that the tool is used in an ethical manner (especially if it achieves widespread use). That said, maybe technologists should be sensitive to how their tools could be repurposed. One commenter on the Augur subreddit ominously posted: "Who should my decentralised assassination drone be launched at for 50 BTC? Hope you're all ready for the future, folks." MATTHEW DE SILVA Matthew is a full-time staff writer for ETHNews with a passion for law and technology. He graduated from Georgetown University where he studied international economics and music. Matthew enjoys biking and listening to tech podcasts. He lives in Los Angeles. ETHNews is committed to its Editorial Policy

5 9